But can they handle adversity?

One of the attributes that is rarely mentioned in the context of hiring, is the individual's ability to roll with the punches.

I'm not speaking here just of the day-in, day-out aspects of their job - such as inevitably occur for someone in, say, sales - but the overall environment on the job and the often rude intrusion of reality.

If you own a smaller, more entrepreneurial firm, this is an important consideration.

Many folks will present at interview with a slightly rose-colored view of their future work environment. They possibly think that working at a smaller - and often fast-growing - firm, is all fun and games. Or, they assume the upward growth of the company will be relentless and dazzling.

Neither of these is a realistic view of working life at a smaller firm. But I have found that many people hold these or similar views, and it can complicate the management of your firm.

Such employees are very enthusiastic while the good times are rolling but, as soon as the company hits a rough spot, they lose interest.

And, as seasoned business owners know, it only takes a few setbacks with the economy or client companies closing down, and your own firm is back to square one in terms of business development. No-one has done anything wrong but the firm soon faces an uphill climb to re-build.

Meanwhile, the people who are less capable about dealing with adversity will be looking for the exit - just when you need to rely on their expertise the most.

One way to avoid this scenario is to screen carefully for prospective employees who have already handled adversity.

During the interview process, be sure to ask some questions, getting them to describe

1) Scenarios from prior employment where they had to work within reduced budgets or through other forms of cutbacks in resources;

2) How they handle their work in a shoestring environment. Those who are creative will come up with answers, whereas those who haven't the inner, personal resources to deal with adversity will more likely give you a blank stare.

During the interview, you not only want to find out what prospective hires have done, but also want to communicate what your firm is like and what is expected in different situations. Getting across the message that times may be bad as well as good, never hurts.

For tips on these and other hiring issues, read my book:

Other People's Problems: Why You Need To Go On Interviewing Your Employees - After You Hire Them!

Is 'Team Player' a dangerous term?

The term 'team player' is probably one of the most overused and dangerous terms in the hiring situation.

It's become so de rigueur that no job applicant would dare say they are not a team player.  However, do you always need a team player for every job?  And what is the downside of being a 'team player'?

If you're in an environment where you want people to take ownership of a project, to run with the ball to get it completed, someone who's a team player may not be a good candidate.

The term 'team player' might all too easily be hiding someone who cannot make decisions on their own, doesn't think independently, and likes to take a passive approach to their work.

We are all capable of sitting in a meeting room with our co-workers, agreeing with everybody else's opinions, and making ourselves sound like a great team player, but does that mean a person who exhibits those behaviors - which are very easy to produce - is actually good at supporting the team?

In situations where, for example, you have a backlog of work, a team player may be the last person you need.  Someone who likes to go off by themselves, tackle the job and get it done, may be a more ideal candidate.  But how will you find this person when every candidate who comes in for the interview feels obliged to say what a great team player they are?

And what is really the definition of a 'team player'?  If you look closely at what is really needed - as opposed to a phrase that is too easy to parrot - you need someone who can get along with other people when necessary, but can go it alone if needed.

Look at the world of sports and you will see how this works in winning teams. Good team players know when to support other people on the team and when they must literally carry or run with the ball to score a goal. In other words, they can do both.

For real success in hiring, it might be better to focus on the skills the person has and determine how they work on their own, leaving identifying their ability to work with the team for your reference checks.

For more insight into some of the pitfalls of hiring and how to avoid them, read my book Other People's Problems: Why You Need To Go On Interviewing Your Employees - After You Hire Them!

http://www.deborahcsawyer.com/shopsite_sc/page2.html



Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer/Information Plus

Are they freeing up your time to build the business?

Most people, when asked, would give a range of reasons for hiring staff at their small businesses but the real, underlying reason, for all hires in a start-up or newer enterprise is to: Free up the owner's time to build the business!

After all, why else would you take anyone on - to share the wealth? C'mon, this is capitalism we're talking about! No owner willingly shares the returns on their sweat equity.

Yet it is amazing how few business owners - never mind employees - realize this fundamental truth.

In order to assess if employees and other staff are really pulling their weight, you need to run their performance through this "freeing up your time" prism constantly.

Obviously, you have to allow for time to train new hires and you have to allow for time to discuss job requirements, new projects that come in, new products or services you plan to offer, new customers etc, as these things arise.

But if you find you are constantly sitting down with any single worker to go over things they are not doing or not doing right, well, that person is definitely NOT freeing up your time to build the business. They are TAKING your time from building the business.

It's unlikely any small business owner has the luxury of that much time - or the funds in the bank to support this diversion of his or her concentration away from building the business.

Be aware of some of the traps that come up with employees who are not supporting your business building goals. My book Other People's Problems goes over all the issues which can siphon off your time - and shows you how to forestall these problems.

For details or to purchase, go to:http://www.deborahcsawyer.com/shopsite_sc/page2.html

Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer

We Don't All Read The Same Business Books...

From time to time, I answer questions on LinkedIn, which is  forum of exchange used by many in business.

The questions I answer tend to be about hiring... firing... policy and procedures... and related topics. Often, the questions - mainly posted by those in management or supervisory roles - concern how to motivate people, how to find out what potential hires are capable of, what to do about under-performing workers, and the like. 

The questions are usually asked by people who are doing their best to keep up with current thinking, often inspired by the latest business books.  What my over 30 years of business and management experience tells me, though, is THAT is half the problem: One set of people at the office reads all the latest books, the other half never does!

Coming in to work brimming with great theories and concepts is all very well but, to be an effective manager, you need to step back and realize: many of those who report to you do not give a damn about the issues you hold most dear. Thinking: "Of course we all want to maximize returns" or "Driving down costs is our collective goal" or any number of other objectives you might care to mention, will leave you disappointed and likely very frustrated. Many rank and file workers do not give a damn about market penetration, don't know what emotional intelligence is and don't care, or go to sleep every time they hear the phrase "mission-critical".

Keeping a more realistic perspective on the workplace may help you to become a more pragmatic - and, in the long run, successful - manager. By all means go on reading the latest gospel to come in the form of a business book but don't subscribe to the ideas so heavily that you end up disillusioned when the great ideas don't pan out in practice as promised.

To look at how ideas are valuable as indicators but not as imperatives, consider how many companies got burned a few years ago by implementing supply-chain management systems. Or the sometimes mixed results from Sigma Six. Or any of a number of other conceptually driven programs.

A great many people out there are good workers but what they want is to have a defined set of tasks, show up, be allowed to perform them, then get paid and go home. They have lives and interests outside the office and, funnily enough, the people who take this approach probably have more work-life balance than those who are busy reading about how to re-invent the wheel that is business.

Some of  the above may seem strange coming from someone who has written business books herself but, the difference in my books - I hope! - is that I try to be pragmatic and offer practical advice, not fancy theories. When you read my latest book, Other People's Problems, you'll be able to decide if I've managed to pull it off!

For details, go to the link below.

http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/other_peoples_problems/9268001


Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer

The Great Divide - Managing for Others Versus Managing for Yourself

I am always open to others' feedback about the books I write. Recently, someone I had asked to review my current title  Other People's Problems advised that she found the book likely to be of limited use to those who already have experience managing people in other businesses.
I thought seriously about this, but then realized that many people who have managed in established organizations are not aware of the differences that a new business owner faces when they set up their own firm.  Even those who have oodles of human resources management experience are likely to face a few challenges.

One of the reasons is that, as a manager in a large enterprise, you have what I call the "weight of the organization" behind you.  The size of the organization... its prominence... its prestige... its length of time in business - all these things can exert checks and balances on employees and how they behave.Whatever your views of your own firm are, people who walk in the door to work for you do not necessarily share your views as to how important your company - or its reputation - is.

Another thing to remember is that, on your own, you no longer have the benefit of OPM - Other People's Money.  Everything employees do, both the good and the bad, has to be covered out of your own pocket.  Realizing that you are the one funding everything may give pause for thought as to how you need to modify your management style and the rules within your organization.

My reviewer also said she found the suspicious tone of the book something of a barrier.  That also gave me pause for thought.  Should I have made this book more upbeat?  Should I have encouraged
new business owners, in particular, to be wildly optimistic?

I think one of the problems with a lot of business writing is that it always looks solely on the positive side.  Unfortunately, the positives in running a business aren't what do you damage.

It's the negatives, including employee sabotage, that do you in.  In my experience, the really damaging and sabotaging employees were those who had been newly hired. They really did not have any track record with my firm that would have led them to bear a grudge. It was probably more that they had a number of chips on their shoulders from life in general that they gave vent to in my company, issues that were not known to anyone giving them a reference.

What I have tried to do in Other People's Problems is tell the truth.  That there is bad along with the good and, to be an effective manager in a small firm and run a successful firm, you need to be aware of the things that could go wrong and have already figured out a way to deal with them.

If I was going to single out my chief flaw as a human resources manager, it would be that I trusted far too many people, far too much.  While some of my employees were eminently worthy of that trust, it only took one who wasn't to ignite the powder keg.

Sections of my book are now available on Google and you can order a copy by going directly to the following link:

http//www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/Other_Peoples_Problems/9268001

Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer

Is Hiring Always The Answer?

For countless years now, a bedrock principle in the business world has been: Growth means quantity.  You grow a business by adding staff... adding locations... adding more product lines... anything and everything that leads to an uptick in quantity.  This "wisdom" is so rarely questioned that it seems no-one ever considers whether it is really still applicable.
Even with the use of technology which allows distributed operations and enables companies to utilize a global network of call centers or manufacturing facilities, plus allows people to work at home, there seems to be an acceptance: that, in order to grow, you must ADD quantity of some sort.

Back when I was running my companies, which were in services, not products, I, too, thought that I had to grow by adding.  In the context of a service business, this usually meant adding people.  However, if I was going to do it all again, I don't think I would take this approach.  For one thing, for many services firm owners - consultants and the like - the skills being offered by the owner represent a unique set and cannot be replicated on the job market.  While it's possible to hire a few support staff - people to answer phones or to do the filing or deal with the correspondence etc. - the core consulting competency rests on such a unique blend of the owner's skills and experience that it is not replicable.

This was actually my situation - had I bothered to step back and look at it - and I would always counsel anyone in a similar position to think carefully before trying to grow in a conventional way by adding people with skill sets theoretically close to yours.  In hindsight, what I should have done is raise my rates and cut down on the volume of work coming into my firms.  Over time, this would have meant slower growth in dollars and volume of accounts, but it would have given me a nice life, free from a lot of headaches!

This is why small business owners need to consider what growth means in terms of quality:
Growing qualitatively means you have a good income, but free time... the opportunity to only do work that is really meaningful to you... the time to look at other ways to contribute to society, such as volunteer work... and a deepening of your own skill and knowledge base.

If you doubt me, consider one of the definitions of the word "grow" in the Merriam-Webster dictionary: "to have an increasing influence". Sometimes, a pre-eminent stature and the influence that goes with it, even if you are close to being a one-man (or woman) band, is worth far more than all the quantitative size you can muster.

If you find yourself at a crossroads where the only way to handle the volume of work and
keep the business afloat seems to be to add more people, take another look and see how a qualitative approach to growth might provide better solutions.

Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer

My latest book (available in print and e-book formats), Other People's Problems:
Why You Need To Go On Interviewing Your Employees- After You Hire Them is available via the following link  http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/other_peoples_problems/9268001

Part 2: Training - For Who's Benefit?

My last blog post, about policies around training costs and possible reimbursement by the company, prompted one entrepreneur to say to me: "Two years... that's a lot!"

As I pointed out to her, all such policies should include a phrase about management being able to waive the policy, if they want.  As a manager, you should always be aware of the difference between an employee who's been on a training course and then has to leave the company, shortly thereafter, due to some factor like a spousal job transfer, and an employee who takes the course and then, three months later, waltzes out the door to a better paying job, bolstered by the training you just paid for.

Another approach is to have a list of courses that the company recommends employees take, if they want to advance, and then have deferred reimbursement to the employee.  That is, if the employee goes ahead, takes the course and pays for it themselves, after a certain amount of time, when you can see the training has had some effect, you can then reimburse the employee.  The list of courses can include a schedule of when the company would reimburse.  Remember, again, small companies rarely have lavish amounts of funds floating around anyway and wanting to see the benefit before shelling out the bucks is perfectly reasonable.

This way, if an employee takes a course, and is quickly able to leverage the skills to get a better paying job, you will not be out of pocket if they leave before they are entitled to reimbursement.

One of the other issues to consider, with all this talk about reimbursing training, is whether or not you will have the money when the employee seeks reimbursement.  Given all the ups and downs of the economy, the best of intentions can often go awry.  Cash flow issues dog most small companies all their lives, and before you set up any policies around training and who pays for it, you may want to consider what you can afford based on your historical worst months or quarters.  That's why another good idea is to put a cap on how much the company will contribute for courses employees take.  Setting up a scale might save you a lot of anguish down the road.

Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer

Deborah C. Sawyer is the author of Other People's Problems:  Why you need to go on interviewing your employees - after you hire them!

http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/other_peoples_problems/9268001

You can also purchase a digital file (e-book) via the same link.

When Your Hiring Practices Help The Other Guy!

It's one thing to seek out people to hire with the expertises you need, in order to gain competitive advantage for your business, it's entirely another matter if the competitive advantage goes, not to your firm, but to your competitors! 

In my book, Other People's Problems, I talk about all the extracurricular baggage a person can bring into the workplace. One of the worst things you can do is to hire somebody and not find out as much as possible about them, not just as a worker, but as a person, so you can detect trouble on the horizon.

When you hire someone, their personal life - their divorce, their juvenile delinquent kid, their gambling habit, their criminal activities, etc.-can introduce a real drag on your firm's fitness to compete. This is why it's often a good idea to hire people on a contract or for a project. Not only can you see how they handle their job duties, you can also get to know them a bit as a person. This way, you will be in the position to offer permanent employment only to those people who will not be bringing personal problems into the workplace.

In a small firm, there is no way you can stay competitive if your personnel are on the phone a third of the time, wrangling with their bank manager or with the lawyer for their ex-spouse.You just don't have the resources, either human or financial, to counteract the damage. Because sadly, if the people you hire are distracted by their domestic and other personal troubles, the only companies who will benefit are those you compete with.

Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer

To some, work is a four-letter word!

Success in the workplace is often as much about expectations as effort. In my book, Other People's Problems, there is a chapter entitled "There's Work And Then There's... Work!" (www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/other_peoples_problems/9268001)
In this chapter, I look at one of the biggest obstacles you will face in hiring for your small business, namely, that what people have done in the past, for the dollars they earn, may be completely at odds with what you expect for the same or similar dollars.  Conversely, people who have been relatively well paid for not doing that much over the course of the day, will be seriously shocked when you require them to work a full eight hour day.

Of course, this is not a problem confined to smaller companies. Several years ago, a client,  who was Senior Vice President at a major insurance company, told me how, after he came on board, his secretary - whom he had inherited from his predecessor - came and complained: Since you joined the company, I'm having to work from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. every day!  He had simply looked at her and replied: "But those are your hours..."

It's very rare in any small company that there will be so little to do that people can move at a snail's pace or sit around and chat. While it's not a given in large organizations and bureaucracies, such as government, that people have nothing to do, if you've ever been in these environments and observed quietly what goes on, you will often see a slower rate of effort being put forth by the employees.

This is why, when hiring for smaller firms, it's a good idea - as much as is possible or allowed under the law - to hire people on some sort of contract or for a shorter-term period, so you can try them out and see how they work. Many times, people will be seeking out employment in a smaller environment precisely because they like to be busy and want the time to go quickly - one of the benefits of having a busy workplace.

However, not everyone feels this way about work, which is why it's important to find ways to sort those who consider 'work' a synonym for joy from those who consider work to be a four-letter word!

Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer

Other people's passwords... and more!

It's not uncommon, at this time of year, for companies to reduce their staff.  Once upon a time, when you let someone go, all you had to worry about was getting back their keys to the front door and seeing that they cleared out their desk.

Nowadays, employers have another issue to contend with: being able to access all the files on someone's computer and otherwise making sure you can get at company e-mails, so there is proper follow-up on any issues that arise.

Having some strategy to deal with this is important, as you never know what people have been getting up to.  Several years ago, after laying off a member of my staff - who was of long service and someone I thought I could trust - I found that she had been using the company's e-mail address to operate her translation business.

I had long known she had offered translation services from home and didn't have a problem with that, but when I found out that the company's e-mail had been used for her business - and she had no doubt been doing her translation work when she was at the office - I saw red! 

There is an old saying that it takes many years to build a reputation but only a few months to destroy one. Witness the many prominent politicians who have been brought down in a short space of time when an unsavory behavior comes to light.  The same thing can happen to companies. When a person will be leaving but they don't yet know they are leaving, is the ideal time to take over e-mail accounts and make sure that any messages sent out are the ones you want sent out. This way, you can ensure such messages reflect favorably on the company.

A disgruntled employee can do a lot of damage if they send a negative e-mail to your entire customer list.

Given that the equipment that employees use at your premises are the property of the company, as an employer, it should be within your rights to know their passwords as a matter of course. Having a policy that they must not only let you know any passwords but also update you if and when they change their passwords is essential. Another option is to discourage all personal uses of company equipment, such as computers and any company-issued cell phones.While these things are hard to enforce, having clear policies about what is and isn't allowed, will protect you legally if and when you terminate any workers.

Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer

For either the print or electronic versions of this book, go to:

http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/other_peoples_problems/9268001

To contact the author, go to:

www.deborahcsawyer.com/dcs_005.htm

The sad reality of "damaged goods"

While every hiring situation poses some risk for the small business owner, if you allow a "kind heart" to influence your hiring decisions, you may find yourself with a counterproductive situation on your hands.
While it's always tempting, as the business owner, to think you might be able to help someone, in a small firm there are rarely the supports or resources to deal with potential outcomes. Sometimes, people who have been through job re-entry programs are really ordinary people just needing a fresh start. But, sometimes, they are people who have been so heavily damaged by past life experiences that there is probably nothing you can do for them.

This turned out to be true for someone I hired years ago named Kathy. Kathy was a white female in her mid-40s, she had had some work experience and had recently completed a job re-entry program. She was reasonably articulate and answered questions well at the interview. It seemed obvious to me, that there was some  intelligence there and, since the job we had was strictly basic entry-level, I decided to hire her.

Sadly, Kathy didn't work out well. She performed well enough when I was in the office but, as soon as I left (which was a frequent requirement) she behaved very badly. She swore loudly, including to people on the phone, and often slammed the phone receiver down and was otherwise abusive with company property.

Around this time, I had planned  a vacation out of the office - always a high risk situation for a small business owner! - and, when I came back, I brought all my staff a very small gift. I had been in India where all manner of very intricate work is available at a very reasonable price. So I bought everyone a small metal box with some tooling and inlay work. Most people thanked me for their gift but Kathy exclaimed: "No-one has ever given me anything before!"

However, this wasn't enough to inspire better performance from her.One of my office staff also told me around this time that, for Christmas, Kathy and her boyfriend were going to spend the day at a rifle range, practicing their shooting. This did strike us all as a rather unfortunate way to spend the holiday.

Due to the problems with her performance, when I wasn't around, and the slamming down of the phone, I eventually let her go.We did give her a good eight weeks trial before this occurred. However, when clearing out her desk after she left, one of my staff found a note Kathy had written and brought it to me. The note simply said:  Why was I born?

I hope that one day Kathy found the right environment, where a combination of  continual supervision and encouragement was available, to help her turn her life around. 

But this does illustrate why "humanitarian hiring" is possibly not the best option for smaller businesses.

Copyright Deborah C. Sawyer